Feminization Has Taken Democratic Party Backward

Jan 26, 2006

RUSH: We’ve been talking a lot lately about what I consider to be the implosion of the Democratic Party and the liberal wing of that party particularly, and I’ve not gotten any response like this or any e-mails, but one of the things a qualified broadcast specialist like me needs is empathy. I think the key ingredient to succeeding in a talk show like this is empathy — and by that I mean you have to be able to, while hosting this show, imagine you’re listening to it and realize, “Okay, I’ve done that enough. Time to get off of it,” and I may be getting close here with this, but I don’t think so yet, because I still sense that there are some of you people out there who are not listening. I sense that there’s some of you people out there who are refusing to accept my warnings on this, and you persist in wanting to run around and live in fear of this once masterful Democrat machine that seemed to never make mistakes and always got what transported, and always defeated us no matter what we did and no matter how smartly we did it. See, I want to keep pounding home the idea that they are in trouble on the Democrat side and on the left, and the express reason for it is twofold. One: Just, again, to demonstrate that my instincts on all this are right. (I don’t know how after 18 years anybody ever doubts me, but they still do.) The second thing is, when the news itself comes from Democrats that they are hopeless, then to those of you who might doubt me, the credibility of such stories or statements coming from Democrats will help you to accept it, and there is also a third reason. Some people just have a problem with good news. “Eeeeeeh, there’s gotta be a catch here somewhere,” and you know those kinds of people: people who are afraid of success. I have never been afraid of success, but a lot of people are, and they’re so insecure that any good news, “Ah, don’t fall for that. That’s just a trick. That’s just temporary. Rush, you’re going off half cocked here. It’s not the way to do it. You need to put the gun back in the holster and hold your fire because it’s not the way.”That’s not me. I see trends. I’m in front of trends. It’s what being “on the cutting edge of societal evolution” is all about. It’s interesting the timing of this column here that I’m going to share with you in a moment, Richard Cohen. Because this week we have been talking about men and women and the way feminism has destroyed the public education system — and it’s literally — I think feminism is one of the real reasons the Democratic Party is heading down the tubes. The Feminization of Democratic Men. There wasn’t too much of that necessary when they started, but that just made the job easier for them, and you look out on the Democrat side. Look at any Democrat leader, any Democrat candidate, and you tell me: In the eyes of tradition, do you see a real man? I don’t. I see wusses. I see wusses that don’t even have the confidence of their own beliefs to tell these wacko leftists to shut up!

“Go ahead and keep sending us money, but shut up. You’re hurting us,” and of course, watching them interact with women, that’s Puke City. That’s even worse. But, we’ve been talking about this all week and most of this program’s history. So here comes this piece. Just to show you how prescient we are on this program, here comes this piece from Richard Cohen today, and he’s very liberal, and he’s a columnist at the Washington Post. “What John Wayne can Teach Democrats — The latest poll is not good for the Democrats, and I’m not talking here of the one showing Bush’s approval rating inching up. I’m talking about the recently released Harris poll showing John Wayne one of the most popular movie stars of 2005. The one thing he and the Democratic Party have in common is that they are both dead. Wayne was the quintessential anti-Democrat. Everything he stood for, from support for the Vietnam War to antipathy to the Sixties and Seventies counterculture was in consonance with GOP positions, and more important: his iconic man-on-horseback image has been adopted by virtually the whole Republican Party.“The Harris people tell us that Wayne, tied for third with Harrison Ford, is a particular favorite of men. Tom Hanks, #1 two years in a row is beloved by women, and both Wayne and Hanks are the choice of conservatives. Liberals chose Johnny Depp as their most popular Hollywood star. Wayne [John Wayne] personifies the gender gap, the virtually habitual way white men vote Republican. There are many reasons for this: Democratic feminism, affirmative action, et cetera, but one of them surely is that the John Wayne style of the Republican Party appeals to the cowboy in most men. Even I, eastern dude that I be, would rather follow The Duke than, say, Johnny Depp. Sorry, my man, but that’s the way it is. Now, back when I met John Wayne he was a dated pro-war caricature. It was 1977. The Duke had somehow been invited to Jimmy Carter’s pre-inaugural gala at the Kennedy Center. “When he was through addressing the crowd he walked right at me, looming his huge and formidable as he seemed on the screen. John Wayne department play in Westerns. John Wayne was a western. Actually he hated horses and never rode if he could possibly avoid it. Since that night, Ronald Reagan has come and gone, and now we have another John Wayne in the White House, another rancher who doesn’t ranch, a cowboy who doesn’t ride. No matter. George Bush shed his family’s eastern ways just as surely as Wayne did his prosaic Iowa upbringing as Marion Morrison, son of Clyde the pharmacist. Well, you can scan the length of time and the breadth of the Democratic Party and you won’t find any breadth, and you won’t find any John Wayne figure, either. “None of the Democratic leaders seems to have what it takes to appeal to white male voters. But if you should happen to be in Room 241 of the Russell Senate Office Building you’ll find Wayne galore, pictures of John Wayne in various Arizona settings. He’s a twofer: a military hero and a westerner. Democrats beware. Okay, Bill Clinton won twice, but he ain’t no cowboy. So it can be done, but in the Harris approximately Wayne is ahead of Julia Roberts, Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson, George Clooney, Sean Connery and Sandra Bullock. Democrats take Note: The Duke is still king.” What is he really saying? He’s pretty blunt with this, wouldn’t you say? What’s he really saying? When I say, “When you look at the Democratic Party, do you see a real man?” No. John Wayne is the quintessential icon image of a real man. So the Republicans somehow have John Wayne and the Democrats have Humpback Mountain. Could there be… I’m sorry. I did it again. You know, Snerdley said that to me the other day and it’s like somebody singing. It’s the last song you hear; you can’t stop whispering it, and I’ve been calling it that ever since Snerdley sent it to me. At any rate, could there be any greater contrast to the two parties? And when you look at the feminization of the whole Democratic Party, look at their definition of their real man. (Feminized Democrat impression) “He’s so touchy, feely, sensitive, metrosexual, sprays cologne all over, spends a lot of time in the hair salons and in the department stores, missing and matching the wardrobe and so forth,” and if there is any hint of a cigar or cigarette smoke, I mean, it’s call-the-cops time — and they’re just wusses. They’re just wusses by comparison. There’s no comparison, and proof that the feminist movement has actually done harm is this, and that it’s taken the party backward. Because it’s a denial of tradition, denial of biology, denial of human nature. So more evidence that they just continue to implode — this time provided by their own spokesman, Richard Cohen in the Washington Post. BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: And let’s not forget — we mentioned this to you yesterday — Maureen Dowd in her latest column has effectively come out and said, explicitly come out and said — whoever it is, Harry Reid, Pelosi — this whole bunch of leaders the Democrats have, they’re not fit. They don’t carry the message. They don’t have any power. They don’t have any influence; they don’t have any oompff behind them. Liz Smith points out today that the “high liberal voice of Texas, Molly Ivins joined in. She writes, “Not backing Hillary.” She cites the senator for not taking a clear stand on a war, failing to speak out on the Terri Schiavo, gross pandering on flag burning, all these “contemptible little dodges.” So Maureen Dowd and Molly Ivins. There’s a pair. Imagine being a guy, folks, and having two women like that call you out. I mean, that’s gotta be emasculating. You know, you’ve a eunuch. Can you imagine being called out by these two? You are so bad, you are so weak that those two call you out. I mean, one thing to be called out by real woman, but these two? I’m telling you: this is a party that is so far out of the mainstream, it is becoming laughable. I’m not taking anything for granted, anything can happen, our side can screw up royally, it doesn’t matter, don’t misunderstand, but look to those people within their context, it is fascinating to watch. They are plummeting off the cliff. They don’t even know they’ve gone over the edge. It’s just amazing. BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Here’s Stan in Las Vegas. Stan, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello. CALLER: Rush, I need to thank you for making any blood boil. I really enjoy it.RUSH: Thank you, sir.CALLER: Keep going. You just talked about the feminization of Democratic men, and when you did it, claimed not to be homo — I’m saying conservatives claim not to be — homophobic. You did it with the lisp that portrayal. You know, a lot of conservative right-wing people’s ideas of what a homo [sic] or a gay individual sounds like, and if that’s not homophobic, there’s a problem with me and I think a whole lot of other Americans in this country.RUSH: And that’s who got you upset?CALLER: Yeah.RUSH: Yeah.CALLER: It didn’t get me upset. It just — it’s hypocritical that, “Oh, I’m not a homophobe. If I’m going to talk about them, I’m going to talk about feminists — the feminization of Democratic men with a — a language that comes out of my mouth that, uh, dictates or sounds like what a lot of people think the — the — uh…”RUSH: Okay. All right, look. This is a fair criticism, and since you’ve called and raised it, let me ask you: Could you tell me what gays sound like? I’m not trying to impersonate them. I’m not trying to.CALLER: Two gay females in my family do not sound like that. I know a number of gay people.RUSH: I’m not imitating females. I’m trying to — You know, I do a lot of impressions, and I’m trying to encapsulate my opinion with an impression.CALLER: Then why don’t you just talk as a regular man would talk?RUSH: Well, because regular men don’t talk like wusses.CALLER: Wait.RUSH: I’m not trying to talk like somebody who’s gay. I’m just trying to make them soft-spoken and sound like they have been eunuchized.CALLER: Yes. I know. But —RUSH: No onions, you know? And that certainly doesn’t describe gays.CALLER: No, what you have done is reiterate your ideas in regards to what a homosexual should sound like, but basically he doesn’t, and I gotta tell you: I’m straight. I am married.

RUSH: It sounds to me like you’re the one with the prejudice. You’re feeling the prejudice. I stir the prejudice in you, and you’re blaming me for what you think.CALLER: No. What I’m saying is —RUSH: You are inferring that I’m sounding like “a gay” even though sauce that gays don’t sound like anything. So they must sound like something to you —CALLER: No. No. They don’t sound like anything to me. They sound like a regular male human being talking to me. What their sexual overtones are or what their sexual…innuendoes are or whatever they may be has nothing to do with the way they talk.RUSH: Okay, let’s try it this way. What does a wuss or a wimp sound like, then? Because that’s what I’m trying to sound like. CALLER: Again —RUSH: This homophobia business, you people have got to get it out of your minds.CALLER: No, no.RUSH: You label us with all these things but you’re the guy that’s coming up with all the definitions of how gays sound and all that.CALLER: (laughs) Wait. You are, again, relating those individuals, wusses and wimps, to homosexuals.RUSH: You are!CALLER: Rock Hudson. RUSH: You are!CALLER: Was Rock Hudson a wimp?RUSH: You are doing it. When I talk about the feminization of Democratic men, I am not talking about gays. Why do you assume that?CALLER: Come on, Rush!RUSH: You are assuming that because you have a stereotype yourself of what a conservative is.CALLER: (chokes) Yeah?RUSH: You do! You think that.CALLER: And that may be 100% totally wrong, because I know some conservatives who are not within that mold.RUSH: Have you ever heard Robin Williams do an impression of a gay?CALLER: Uhhh, yes.RUSH: All right. Did you call him and say it’s not fair?CALLER: No, no, no, no, no! I’m sorry. Not a gay!RUSH: Yes! Liberal comedians make more fun of gays than I have in my whole life. They’ll do it in one routine. Anyway, look, I appreciate being able to explain this and answer it to you, but it just confirms for me that it works.END TRANSCRIPT

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.